A victim’s unawareness of the accused’s existing marriage supported a cheating conviction for a relationship induced by a marriage promise.

In brief

The question

Whether the evidence established that the appellant’s alleged false representation or concealment induced the victim’s consent, sustaining his conviction under Section 417 IPC

The court held

The appeal was dismissed and the conviction under Section 417 IPC was confirmed.

It also directed

The custodial sentence was reduced to the period already undergone; the fine was enhanced from ₹50,000 to ₹1,50,000, with ₹1,45,000 payable to the victim as compensation.

The fine was to be deposited within four weeks, with four months’ simple imprisonment in default

01Facts

The prosecution alleged that the appellant had sexual intercourse with the victim on multiple occasions between May 2014 and October 2015, having promised to marry her and concealed that he was already married.

pp. 2, 7–8

The victim maintained that she did not know of his marriage until she and her parents visited his house

pp. 2, 7–8

The Sessions Court convicted the appellant under Section 417 IPC and sentenced him to one year’s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹50,000

p. 2, 4

He appealed, arguing that the victim knew he was married and that the relationship was consensual

pp. 4–5

02Issues

i.Whether the evidence established that the appellant’s alleged false representation or concealment induced the victim’s consent, sustaining his conviction under Section 417 IPC

pp. 4, 7–9

ii.Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court required modification

p. 9

03Law Applied

The Court considered Section 417 IPC, which prescribes punishment for cheating; the prosecution’s case was that the appellant’s alleged deception regarding his intention to marry and existing marriage induced the victim to enter the relationship

pp. 2–3

The judgment does not cite any precedent or set out a separate, detailed legal test for cheating.

Its assessment focused on whether the evidence showed that the victim knew of the appellant’s existing marriage or otherwise undermined her account of the alleged deception

pp. 7–9

Provisions in the judgment · 8 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 374 Section 207 Section 313 Section 164

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 417 Section 376 Section 420

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the victim consistently described a relationship from May 2014 to October 2015 and that cross-examination had not elicited material to discredit her account.

p. 8

It found no evidence establishing that she knew the appellant was married to P.W.15; the asserted presence of the appellant’s wife at a relative’s wedding did not, in the Court’s view, establish such knowledge.

p. 7, 9

It therefore found no basis to disturb the Section 417 conviction.

p. 9

However, considering the nature and duration of the relationship and the appellant’s age, it concluded that the sentence should be modified.

p. 9

05Holding

The appeal was dismissed and the conviction under Section 417 IPC was confirmed.

p. 9

The custodial sentence was reduced to the period already undergone; the fine was enhanced from ₹50,000 to ₹1,50,000, with ₹1,45,000 payable to the victim as compensation.

p. 9

The fine was to be deposited within four weeks, with four months’ simple imprisonment in default

p. 9

LawLens.Madras High Court

Original Court PDF